• Clockwise in reply to @Hefty

    From what I have seen any/all cycling that results in injury is wanton in a kinda "you are on a bicycle and something has happened that's wanton".

    For driving being over the speed limit is "being careless and not noticing the speedo" running a red light is "being careless and not seeing the lights" and so on. At times it feels you would need to be in an OJ style televised chase before it was apparent your actions had been intentionally breaking a law.

    Also if someone is wanton cycling at 15-20mph often in a 30mph zone how is a driver careless driving at 40mph+ in a 30mph zone? That might not be specific to the case mentioned but it's a recurring theme.

    The harsh wording will have a huge impact, if those reading it aren't cyclists hearing that the cyclist was furious and wanton rather than just careless totally changes the emotions involved. If it was "death by clumsy cycling accident" it entirely changes it.

    Can this be raised? Whom would it need to be taken to? Some kind of online vote thingy, like the ones I get where a certain number of signatures and it has to be discussed in parliament?

  • Without commenting on the impending case in court. It's an old piece of legislation that is used to fall back on if nothing else fits any better. If the collision took place in a park or on a shared walkway then it would be used in preference to a road traffic law. It would best suit offences relating to horse drawn carriages charging through towns like in the wild west films with flocks of chickens being scattered etc.
    Also in addition to where the collision occurred; if specific warnings relating to impending consideration of prosecution weren't given to the cyclist at or within a certain time then this old legislation is the fall-back position.

About